The following five bills have been passed by the legislature and are now on the Governorís desk awaiting his action. All of these bills directly impact firearms owners, shooters, and sportsmen. Use the collective power of your CRPA membership and make your voice heard at the state capitol! Email, call, and/or write the Governor and let him know you are a CRPA member and tell him your position on these bills. Contact information for the Governorís office is included below.

Ask the Governor to Sign SB 610

SB 610 Ė License to Carry a Concealed Handgun
(CRPA Position: Support)ASK THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN SB 610
SB 610 requires that applicants for a license to carry a concealed handgun would not be required to pay for any training courses prior to a determination of good cause being made. The bill would also provide that no applicant would be required to obtain liability insurance as a condition of the license. In addition, the licensing authority must notify the applicant if the request for a license was denied and shall state the reason from the departmentís published policy as to why the license was denied.

AB 144 Ė Ban on Open Carry of Unloaded Handguns
(CRPA Position: Oppose)
URGE A VETO
AB 144 authored by Assembly Member Portantino is a remake of last yearís AB 1934. AB 1934 was introduced by Assembly Member Saldana and to the relief of firearms owners was defeated on the last night of the legislative session. AB 144 would again prohibit the open carry of an unloaded handgun in most public places. Just like last year, this bill concerns gun owners and sportsmen. It leaves no option for self-protection especially in counties where it is impossible to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun. The bill does not take into account public and private lands used by the public for outdoor recreation purposes. Hunters, fishermen, hikers, campers, and others would not be able to openly carry a handgun while recreating on vast tracts of public land and would be at risk in remote areas with no means to protect themselves. Many remote areas do not have cell phone coverage making it impossible to call for law enforcement help. Even if a person were able to call for help, the time for law enforcement to respond would be too long to be of any assistance. People need the option to carry a handgun for self-defense, and AB 144 takes all options away.

AB 809 Ė Rifle and Shotgun Registration
(CRPA Position: Oppose)
URGE A VETO
AB 809 was reintroduced this year by Assembly Member Feuer in an attempt to require registration of all newly acquired rifles and shotguns, similar to the required registration of handguns. This is another form of AB 1810 which you may recall was defeated last year. The $400K estimated cost to implement rifle and shotgun registration is far less than the real cost. A good example is Canada. With a population less than California, Canada has spent billions on long gun registration and is now considering throwing the registration system out because there have been no demonstrated benefits to law enforcement.

SB 427 Ė Ammunition Registration
(CRPA Position: Oppose)
URGE A VETO
SB 427 would require registration of handgun ammunition and some rifle cartridges, including .22 rimfire and would stop online and mail order purchase for delivery to your home or business. For example, you would no longer be able to purchase handgun ammunition and some rifle ammunition online or by mail from Midsouth or BassPro Shops for delivery to your home or business. It also requires vendors to obtain a local license to sell ammunition. The bill has been amended to include specific cartridges, including .22 rimfire.

SB 819 Ė Redirection of Dealer Record of Sales Fee (DROS)
(CRPA Position: Oppose)
URGE A VETO
SB 819 would allow the state Department of Justice (DOJ) to raid the DROS and take "excessĒ money to pay for local enforcement of laws related to firearms possession. The primary purpose of the DROS fee paid by every firearms purchaser is to fund the purchaser background checks performed by the Department of Justice. DROS fund fees are a fee for service and should be used for their intended purpose: background checks. The concern is that the DROS fund will be depleted and soon require an increased DROS fee for all firearms purchasers.